Should you physically remove secondary NVMe drives when performing a clean Windows install?

[Maxiaid]

I recently upgraded the CPU in my personal system. It works just fine, but wanting to follow "best practice" I have decided to perform a clean reinstall of Windows 11 just to make sure all drivers are properly replaced and I get the most performance out of it. 24H2 also broke a bunch of settings, so I figured now was the time. However, I have seen yet another "best practice" type of advice being thrown around which completely removes my desire to deal with all this: "it's important to make sure you physically remove all other drives but the one you want Windows to boot from before performing a clean install".

This would be a massive hassle for me. I also don't want to put unnecessary wear on the 12VHPWR connector by repeatedly removing and reinstalling the GPU for no good reason.

Thing is I only have 2 NVMe drives, and the secondary one is already fully partitioned with one partition and no unallocated space. My assumption is that Windows wouldn't be able to add anything to that drive if the only unallocated space available for the installation was in the main one, but I haven't seen this discussed anywhere. Target drive is also M.2_1 (Disk 0) and closest to CPU.

Is this really important, or just something tutorials include to be idiot-proof?

If the root problem is partitions being allocated to several drives, then actual best practice would be to check and make sure all of them got installed where they're supposed to, not necessarily having to physically remove everything unless you had a stubborn system that gave you trouble for whatever reason. But what do I know, I'm completely illiterate when it comes to the registry, if it includes inherently problematic references to several drives or what a "boot sector" even is. For what I've read I'd assume it's part of the EFI partition, so you'd just have to check it is where it's supposed to. I'd also be nuking the secondary drive afterwards for good measure to see if it boots just fine.

Could you guys share your experiences and knowledge on the topic? As always, thanks in advance.


EDIT: I'll rephrase the main questions I have in two bullet points.

1. If only 2 NVMe M.2 drives are present –intended for boot and secondary–, you then consciously clear all partitions in the drive intended for boot and leave the secondary drive with all its space allocated beforehand (no unallocated space, only one large partition, media files, no OS files), can Windows possibly install anything onto it (create new partitions or allocate the boot loader onto it)... or is it fail-safe in this regard?
2. Is this only a dislocated partition issue? In the sense that, if after finishing the process you check your disk manager and all partitions are in the same (intended) drive, you're 100% good to go and trouble-free.

Since asked for, I'll quote references to how widespread this recommendation is. They are of no particular relevance.
e.g. Video 1 (1:21), Video 2 (7:00), Video 3 (1:30)... and the list goes on.

 

[SL2]

Mate, that was about 25 years ago.

Thank you for your insightful reply. It was reply to someone who had a hard time believing it.

I meant ALL NT 5, not only 5.0. So given that XP was very popular for at least 10 years thanks to Vista, we're now down to 15 years ago lol, still an eternity

 

[A Computer Guy]

• RAID array likely increases the chances of it happening.

I'm not so sure it's RAID as much as how the UEFI or the OS orders storage devices. Somewhere there is a pecking order for device enumeration and that may play a role in how the OS installation lays out partitions when given the chance. I know it's happened to me several times over the years after MS Vista came onto the scene but not often enough that it was a problem. I used to have a habit of formatting drives and not deleting partitions when putting them back into storage for use later. These days I always clear the partitions before installing them again much like LabRat891 wrote about.

In the screenshot below are 3 systems of mine. The one with the red arrow is the primary boot drive. Since I only install OS with a single drive (99% of the time) I never have an issue. But you can see below how different systems and configurations the OS sees the drive enumeration differently.

( Warning the first image might trigger your OOCD. )

 

[SL2]

I'm not so sure it's RAID as much as how the UEFI or the OS orders storage devices. Somewhere there is a pecking order for device enumeration and that may play a role in how the OS installation lays out partitions when given the chance.

I agree, forgot to mention it. Which port/slot used for OS can make a difference, even without 3:rd party disk controllers.

Given the amount of retro machines popping up it's still relevant.

 

[blinnbanir]

The issue I have with clearing Partitions is if you have a big Steam Library or other Game files stored on those drives. Re downloading a Game is not fun if your Internet is not up to snuff. There is also the issue of Gamepass that in some cases will make you re install Game files that are already on your PC.

 

[chrcoluk]

There is ways round the problem, if partitions already exist and you select the main ntfs partition as the target, it wont redo partitions and the problem shouldnt happen. So this is ok if you reinstalling over a previous version of windows or if shift f10, use diskpart to manually make the partitions, and then manually select the partition you made for the windows files.
If you select an unpartitioned disk, which triggers the automatic partition creation, then you might hit the problem of using the wrong drive in a multi drive setup.

 

[eidairaman1]

Since the XP days I've left other storage drives disconnected when installing the os so no boot partitions/files become fragmented across drives.

 

[Maxiaid]

I think once ever, maybe twice there was an occasion where Windows installer (probably Vista or 7) created a partition on a different drive to the one I selected during installation.

I did a quick web search and realised that the partition could be deleted.

I've done triple-digit manual Windows installs since then, and stopped caring about the issue because as of Windows 8 I've never experienced that issue. I'm going to assume it was just a bug that slipped past the stuffed parrot that Microsoft used for QC back in those days.

You got any idea what kind of animal they use for QC these days?

Great detailed rundown.

But... there's a dead simple solution, that satisfies their nebulous concern(s): Backup externally, wipe all drives.

Backup User Files and Game Install(s/ers), externally
Boot to Windows Installation Media
Shift+F10
DISKPART - LIST DISK - SELECT DISK 0(/1/2/etc.) - CLEAN - CONVERT GPT
EXIT - EXIT
continue with install - @ drive selection, select the empty drive you want Windows on - click Install/next.

Drives that are 'CLEAN' appear to Windows like they were fresh out of the box new. If they are not initialized, Windows Installer will not put files onto them, nor format them.
So, if all drives are CLEANed, only the drive you point the Windows Installer @, will get formatted and files installed to it.

edit:
The "CLEAN" Diskpart command is almost 0-wear to a NAND SSD. AFAIK, no 'worse' than a "quick format"
Do not "CLEAN ALL" an SSD unless you want an entire drivewrite of wear applied.

Isn't that effectively the same as clearing all partitions through the regular UI?
Now that you mention diskpart, may I get a word on how to extend the EFI partition upon installation? As noted in another post, I've already had problems with the standard 100MB running short.

Thank you for your insightful reply. It was reply to someone who had a hard time believing it.

I meant ALL NT 5, not only 5.0. So given that XP was very popular for at least 10 years thanks to Vista, we're now down to 15 years ago lol, still an eternity

I'm a teacher and sometimes my students don't get my "funny" references anymore. I bet it's the exact same feeling.

 

[AleXXX666]

Normally i would disconnect them to be sure, how ever with this system ( AM5 ) i just turned the other drives off in the bios.

lol, disconnect physically seems easier for me than tinkering on-off in bios. Well, if you are into "big metal multi-nvme heatsink" covered with massive gpu, then yes, maybe.....

Since the XP days I've left other storage drives disconnected when installing the os so no boot partitions/files become fragmented across drives.

yeah, idiotic windows behaviour, hate this BS; I'm better disconnected, at least on clients machines.

 

[Maxiaid]

Well, if you are into "big metal multi-nvme heatsink" covered with massive gpu, then yes, maybe.....

You tell me

 

[Chrispy_]

You got any idea what kind of animal they use for QC these days?

I'm pretty sure that paying customers have been the QC department for the last half decade, enterprise clients too.

"Hey, let's just roll it out and see which bugs are so bad that they ground all flights in the US or break Wall Street and crash the economy lol"

 

[Mr. Perfect]

I've tried to look into that option and what I've read is it usually can't be done to NVMe drives unless very high end motherboard, which I guess a B650 isn't. I can't access my computer at the moment so I can't check by myself. I'm not well versed in messing around with BIOS settings either. Where is that option usually listed? If possible for a MSI BIOS specifically (thank you).

Chipset drivers, mainly. I went from 7800X3D to 9800X3D so no core parking or scheduling involved. I know I need not do it, but then again, I wanted to do a fresh install anyway.

If your board supports it, it should be in the storage section somewhere. I've never had an MSI board, so I can't say for sure.

That said, I tried to get a screenshot of these options in a Gigabyte X870 board and they only allow shutdown of SATA ports. Meanwhile, every boring ass Dell I administer at work has clear and easy options to shut off individual drives. Kind of disappointed in Gigabyte right now.

 

[Maxiaid]

If your board supports it, it should be in the storage section somewhere. I've never had an MSI board, so I can't say for sure.

That said, I tried to get a screenshot of these options in a Gigabyte X870 board and they only allow shutdown of SATA ports. Meanwhile, every boring ass Dell I administer at work has clear and easy options to shut off individual drives. Kind of disappointed in Gigabyte right now.

View attachment 391886

Wow. I was not expecting Dell of all to be the feature-rich one. I don't think it's a Gigabyte thing either, I've read people saying "this would be such a nice feature" for both Asus and MSI.

 

[Redwoodz]

Depends on what's on the other drives. If there is a Windows install on it, it can modify the the boot drive on the other HDD, so I would remove it then.

 

[Zyll Goliat]

Well last year when I get myself X299 it almost get me insane when I get strange error when win installation supposed to start then I googled error and realized that I need to disconnect other drives because I had many drives enabled then I left "only"3 drives enabled and finally successfully installed windows.....never had that problem before or after ....

 

[AleXXX666]

Depends on what's on the other drives. If there is a Windows install on it, it can modify the the boot drive on the other HDD, so I would remove it then.

That's the issue. No windows on other drive, but Windows decides itself to put bootloader to "other" drive!
After some time, when you decide to disconnect the other drive for some reason, you could get f...ed up with BSOD "no boot found", lol
I duno, recently maybe this is not an issue maybe, but this BS happened to me MANY times with win 10 too (I will not mention older windows lol)

You tell me

exactly. I like my 2nd PC to be "ready" for modifying, every time. So I don't need to waste a time+time without this PC working, just a few minutes and part gotta replaced, lol, be it even mobo

 

[Maxiaid]

That's the issue. No windows on other drive, but Windows decides itself to put bootloader to "other" drive!
After some time, when you decide to disconnect the other drive for some reason, you could get f...ed up with BSOD "no boot found", lol
I duno, recently maybe this is not an issue maybe, but this BS happened to me MANY times with win 10 too (I will not mention older windows lol)

No reference to 25yo versions? You're not a real computer expert then.
Jokes aside, the "many times" when this happened, can you confirm the issue was caused by the EFI partition being put on a different drive?

 

[AleXXX666]

No reference to 25yo versions? You're not a real computer expert then.
Jokes aside, the "many times" when this happened, can you confirm the issue was caused by the EFI partition being put on a different drive?

don't know what you mean, but that's exactly what should have been happened - the boot partition was put to different drive - because disconnecting this other drive which is without windows install causes BSOD that boot partition wasn't found.

 

[Solaris17]

There seems to be a lot of confusion about this still. I am honestly surprised it made it to two pages and literally no one wrote why this happens.

It’s simple especially if you have modified or otherwise handled windows deployments.

From the dawn of time windows has been set to put the boot loader, be that UEFI or CSM.

On drive 0 OR an existing drive with a writable file system that is on a LOWER order than the target disk.

The rest of the OS will go where you want; but the boot partition will always try to separate. Since BIOS initializes disks in order. Boot order can be changed yes; but initialization still happens, still in order, and that’s how this was created decades ago.

You can take disks out sure

You can disable disks even easier

Yoy could also just install drives in the proper order.

You can see the drive preference in almost every bios since forever. Sometimes NVMe is processed first, sometimes NVMe drives are processed last.

It doesn’t matter that you mix sata and nvme

It doesn’t matter if you mix NVMe and ide

it doesn’t matter if you mix SSD and HDD

That is not what it cares about.

Find the physical port numbering and install your OS drive on 0 or 1 depending on how your board enumerates.

Otherwise disable the others so you don’t get a partition split.

Yes this still happens, yes it is still this way; from DOS to Windows 11.

Luck is luck but this is a configuration literally coded into the OS installer.

If you ever want to see or play with this go look at the autoattend file, or customize.xml or use a deployment tool like MDT that exposes this in a pretty way.

Here I will pull up mine.

The default drive is "0". Not to be confused with M.2 0 and SATA Port 0. "0" in this context will be whatever your BIOS wants to initiate first.

Its not rocket science or magic. Companies that run deployments have had to deal with this for literal decades. The default is Disk 0 Part 1. Thats what any and every ISO you download is set too.

 

[Maxiaid]

There seems to be a lot of confusion about this still. I am honestly surprised it made it to two pages and literally no one wrote why this happens.

It’s simple especially if you have modified or otherwise handled windows deployments.

From the dawn of time windows has been set to put the boot loader, be that UEFI or CSM.

On drive 0 OR an existing drive with a writable file system that is on a LOWER order than the target disk.

The rest of the OS will go where you want; but the boot partition will always try to separate. Since BIOS initializes disks in order. Boot order can be changed yes; but initialization still happens, still in order, and that’s how this was created decades ago.

You can take disks out sure

You can disable disks even easier

Yoy could also just install drives in the proper order.

You can see the drive preference in almost every bios since forever. Sometimes NVMe is processed first, sometimes NVMe drives are processed last.

It doesn’t matter that you mix sata and nvme

It doesn’t matter if you mix NVMe and ide

it doesn’t matter if you mix SSD and HDD

That is not what it cares about.

Find the physical port numbering and install your OS drive on 0 or 1 depending on how your board enumerates.

Otherwise disable the others so you don’t get a partition split.

Yes this still happens, yes it is still this way; from DOS to Windows 11.

Luck is luck but this is a configuration literally coded into the OS installer.

If you ever want to see or play with this go look at the autoattend file, or customize.xml or use a deployment tool like MDT that exposes this in a pretty way.

Here I will pull up mine.

View attachment 392294

The default drive is "0". Not to be confused with M.2 0 and SATA Port 0. "0" in this context will be whatever your BIOS wants to initiate first.

Its not rocket science or magic. Companies that run deployments have had to deal with this for literal decades. The default is Disk 0 Part 1. Thats what any and every ISO you download is set too.

Tysm for the insight!

 

[blinnbanir]

There seems to be a lot of confusion about this still. I am honestly surprised it made it to two pages and literally no one wrote why this happens.

It’s simple especially if you have modified or otherwise handled windows deployments.

From the dawn of time windows has been set to put the boot loader, be that UEFI or CSM.

On drive 0 OR an existing drive with a writable file system that is on a LOWER order than the target disk.

The rest of the OS will go where you want; but the boot partition will always try to separate. Since BIOS initializes disks in order. Boot order can be changed yes; but initialization still happens, still in order, and that’s how this was created decades ago.

You can take disks out sure

You can disable disks even easier

Yoy could also just install drives in the proper order.

You can see the drive preference in almost every bios since forever. Sometimes NVMe is processed first, sometimes NVMe drives are processed last.

It doesn’t matter that you mix sata and nvme

It doesn’t matter if you mix NVMe and ide

it doesn’t matter if you mix SSD and HDD

That is not what it cares about.

Find the physical port numbering and install your OS drive on 0 or 1 depending on how your board enumerates.

Otherwise disable the others so you don’t get a partition split.

Yes this still happens, yes it is still this way; from DOS to Windows 11.

Luck is luck but this is a configuration literally coded into the OS installer.

If you ever want to see or play with this go look at the autoattend file, or customize.xml or use a deployment tool like MDT that exposes this in a pretty way.

Here I will pull up mine.

View attachment 392294

The default drive is "0". Not to be confused with M.2 0 and SATA Port 0. "0" in this context will be whatever your BIOS wants to initiate first.

Its not rocket science or magic. Companies that run deployments have had to deal with this for literal decades. The default is Disk 0 Part 1. Thats what any and every ISO you download is set too.

What is funny is if you have been into PCs for even 10 years you have lived this. Too bad Social media has made people think Talking heads know everything.

 

[Maxiaid]

What is funny is if you have been into PCs for even 10 years you have lived this. Too bad Social media has made people think Talking heads know everything.

That's why I'm here asking. Not everybody is as experienced as you are.

 

[eidairaman1]

There seems to be a lot of confusion about this still. I am honestly surprised it made it to two pages and literally no one wrote why this happens.

It’s simple especially if you have modified or otherwise handled windows deployments.

From the dawn of time windows has been set to put the boot loader, be that UEFI or CSM.

On drive 0 OR an existing drive with a writable file system that is on a LOWER order than the target disk.

The rest of the OS will go where you want; but the boot partition will always try to separate. Since BIOS initializes disks in order. Boot order can be changed yes; but initialization still happens, still in order, and that’s how this was created decades ago.

You can take disks out sure

You can disable disks even easier

Yoy could also just install drives in the proper order.

You can see the drive preference in almost every bios since forever. Sometimes NVMe is processed first, sometimes NVMe drives are processed last.

It doesn’t matter that you mix sata and nvme

It doesn’t matter if you mix NVMe and ide

it doesn’t matter if you mix SSD and HDD

That is not what it cares about.

Find the physical port numbering and install your OS drive on 0 or 1 depending on how your board enumerates.

Otherwise disable the others so you don’t get a partition split.

Yes this still happens, yes it is still this way; from DOS to Windows 11.

Luck is luck but this is a configuration literally coded into the OS installer.

If you ever want to see or play with this go look at the autoattend file, or customize.xml or use a deployment tool like MDT that exposes this in a pretty way.

Here I will pull up mine.

View attachment 392294

The default drive is "0". Not to be confused with M.2 0 and SATA Port 0. "0" in this context will be whatever your BIOS wants to initiate first.

Its not rocket science or magic. Companies that run deployments have had to deal with this for literal decades. The default is Disk 0 Part 1. Thats what any and every ISO you download is set too.

Youd think ms would have fixed the partition split by now...